Tag Archives: peer review

a letter to reviewer 2

Posted on November 20, 2023 by pat thomson

Dear Reviewer 2, I guess your ears often burn. You know how it is when people read your reviews. That must be hard for you – I know you spend time reading and working out what to say. I also … Continue reading →

Posted in literature reviews, peer review, reviewer 2, reviewing, reviews | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

familiarity and peer review

Posted on March 7, 2022 by pat thomson

I’ve been doing some literature work. Now don’t get me wrong, I love literature work. But I am finding it all a bit same old same old right now. All the papers read the sme, even though they have different … Continue reading →

Posted in familiarity, genre, mere exposure effect, peer review | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

dealing with rejection

Posted on August 31, 2020 by pat thomson

This is a guest post from Dan Cleather. Dan is a strength coach, educator, scientist and anarchist. His latest book, “Subvert! A philosophical guide for the 21st century scientist”, was published in May. Being an academic requires a thick skin. Very … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, peer review, rejection, research funding | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

peer reviewing your first paper

Posted on October 14, 2019 by pat thomson

Patter now has over 800 posts. It’s pretty hard to find things on here, even when you know what you’re looking for. Some of the elderly posts are, I hope, still useful. I’ve decided to start an occasional ‘best of’ … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, feedback, journal article, peer review, refereeing, reviewing, reviews | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

professors of the poison pen

Posted on October 30, 2017 by pat thomson

Paul Stein’s 1939 film, The Poison Pen, is set in a small English village whose residents receive anonymous letters alleging sexual and moral misbehaviour. The recipients become increasingly angry and bent on revenge. A formerly quiet and placid place becomes … Continue reading →

Posted in peer review, poison pen, Professor | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

when peer review is scent marking

Posted on June 19, 2017 by pat thomson

Continuing random posts on peer reviewer behaviour… So we all know what scent marking is. It’s when animals set out the boundaries of their territory by leaving their scent in strategic places. Scentmarked territories are often used for sleeping and/or mating … Continue reading →

Posted in disciplines, journal article, peer review, subfield, territoriality, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

self-citation by proxy

Posted on May 15, 2017 by pat thomson

Meet Dr Oozing-Confidence. He knows his work is important. Very important. Superior even. He gets very miffed when he reads anything that is on his topic, or connected with it, that doesn’t recognise his contributions and their significance. He is always keen … Continue reading →

Posted in conversation, journal article, peer review, self-citation | Tagged , , , | 5 Comments

a case of conflicting reviewer comments

Posted on May 27, 2013 by pat thomson

So you’ve sent the paper into the journal and now the referee comments are in your in-box. You finally pluck up the courage to open the email and what do you find? Contradictory comments. Not helpful. Not at all. We … Continue reading →

Posted in conflicting reviews, journal, journal editor, peer review, refereeing | Tagged , , , , | 5 Comments

refereeing a journal article. part 3. writing the feedback

Posted on January 19, 2012 by pat thomson

Having read the article carefully, and decided whether it’s accept without change, revise and resubmit or reject, there is now the task of writing the feedback to the author/s. There are four things to keep in mind when writing feedback: … Continue reading →

Posted in feedback, journal, peer review, refereeing | Tagged , , , , | 16 Comments

refereeing a journal article. part 1: reading

Posted on January 7, 2012 by pat thomson

So you’ve just got an article to review and you’re not sure how to go about it. Before even beginning to read, the first thing to get clear about is the STANCE you have to take as a reviewer. Once … Continue reading →

Posted in journal, peer review, reading, refereeing | Tagged , , , , , | 10 Comments